WASHINGTON (AP) — A House committee voted Thursday to
subpoena records relating to a waiting list at the Phoenix veterans
hospital, and officials said Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki
had ordered a nationwide audit of access to care that the agency
provides.

Meanwhile, Shinseki brushed aside calls for his
resignation and got an unexpected political lifeline from House Speaker
John Boehner following reports that 40 patients died because of delayed
treatment at an agency hospital.

The American Legion and some in
Congress have called for Shinseki's ouster following allegations of
patient deaths at the Phoenix VA hospital due to delays in care and of a
secret list the hospital kept of patients waiting for appointments to
hide the delays.

The House Veterans Affairs Committee voted
unanimously to subpoena all emails and other records in which Shinseki
and other VA officials may have discussed destruction of what the
committee called "an alternate or interim waitlist" for veterans seeking
care in Phoenix.

A top VA official had told congressional staff
last month that the "secret list" referred to in news reports may have
been an "interim list" created by the hospital. And the committee had
asked the VA on May 1 to answer why it was created, when it was
destroyed, who authorized destruction and under what authority.

Shinseki
answered in a letter Wednesday that VA employees used "transitory or
interim notes ... for reference purposes" as they were moving
information to the new electronic waitlist system. Regulations of the
National Archives and Records Administration require that such notes be
destroyed when they are no longer needed for reference, the VA says.

Dissatisfied
with that response, the committee subpoenaed all documents relating to
the destruction and gave Shinseki until 9 a.m. May 19 to produce them.
The VA said in a statement that it will review the subpoena and respond.

Earlier Thursday, Shinseki told CBS that he
sent inspectors to Phoenix immediately after he learned of reports
about the deaths. "I take every one of these incidents and allegations
seriously, and we're going to go and investigate," he said.

The VA
also announced Thursday that Shinseki had ordered the Veterans Health
Administration last month to do a "a face-to-face" audit at all clinics
at VA medical centers to make sure employees understand VA's policy and
the need for continued integrity in managing patient access to care.

And
at a Capitol Hill news conference, Boehner, R-Ohio, said: "I'm not
ready to join the chorus of people calling on him to step down." He
added that there is a "systemic management issue throughout the VA that
needs to be addressed."

Shinseki announced last week that three
officials at the Phoenix facility have been placed on leave while the VA
inspector general investigates.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has long had a seemingly endless backlog and exceedingly long delays for treatment.

Boehner said the House is working on legislation that would give the head of the agency "more flexibility to fire people."

The
White House has voiced support for Shinseki amid the calls for his
ouster from the American Legion as well as from Republican Sens. Richard
Burr of North Carolina, John Cornyn of Texas and Jerry Moran of Kansas.
Veterans groups are split on whether he should resign.

White
House spokesman Josh Earnest said President Barack Obama has full
confidence in Shinseki. He said Shinseki shares the president's passion
for living up to the commitment that the U.S. has made to its veterans.

Earnest
told reporters traveling with Obama in California that the VA has made
tremendous progress in reducing the case backlog. He said while the
backlog is moving in the right direction, the White House won't be
satisfied until it is eliminated.

Numbering more than 600,000 when
it hit its high point in March 2013, the backlog in VA cases had been
cut in half to 308,000 by early May, the VA said. The department deems
cases to be part of the backlog once they've gone 125 days without being
processed. The VA said it completed more than 500,000 of its oldest
claims last year.

At the same time, the VA has acknowledged that
23 patients have died as a result of delayed care in recent years. The
VA's Office of Medical Inspector said clerks at a Fort Collins,
Colorado, clinic were instructed last year on how to falsify appointment
records. Other problems have occurred in Pittsburgh, Atlanta and
Augusta, Georgia.

___

Associated Press writers David Espo and Josh Lederman in Washington and Jim Kuhnhenn in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

(CNN) -- At least 40 U.S. veterans died waiting for
appointments at the Phoenix Veterans Affairs Health Care system, many of
whom were placed on a secret waiting list.

The secret list was part
of an elaborate scheme designed by Veterans Affairs managers in Phoenix
who were trying to hide that 1,400 to 1,600 sick veterans were forced to
wait months to see a doctor, according to a recently retired top VA
doctor and several high-level sources.

Internal e-mails obtained
by CNN show that top management at the VA hospital in Arizona knew
about the practice and even defended it.

Dr. Sam Foote just
retired after spending 24 years with the VA system in Phoenix. The
veteran doctor told CNN in an exclusive interview that the Phoenix VA
works off two lists for patient appointments:

There's an "official"
list that's shared with officials in Washington and shows the VA has
been providing timely appointments, which Foote calls a sham list. And
then there's the real list that's hidden from outsiders, where wait
times can last more than a year.

Deaths tied to VA hospital's secret list

Veterans dying waiting for healthcare

Are we fulfilling our promise to veterans?

Deliberate scheme, shredded evidence

"The scheme was
deliberately put in place to avoid the VA's own internal rules," said
Foote in Phoenix. "They developed the secret waiting list," said Foote, a
respected local physician.

The VA requires its hospitals to provide care to patients in a timely manner, typically within 14 to 30 days, Foote said.

According to Foote, the
elaborate scheme in Phoenix involved shredding evidence to hide the long
list of veterans waiting for appointments and care. Officials at the
VA, Foote says, instructed their staff to not actually make doctor's
appointments for veterans within the computer system.

Instead, Foote says,
when a veteran comes in seeking an appointment, "they enter information
into the computer and do a screen capture hard copy printout. They then
do not save what was put into the computer so there's no record that you
were ever here," he said.

According to Foote, the
information was gathered on the secret electronic list and then the
information that would show when veterans first began waiting for an
appointment was actually destroyed.

"That hard copy, if you
will, that has the patient demographic information is then taken and
placed onto a secret electronic waiting list, and then the data that is
on that paper is shredded," Foote said.

"So the only record that
you have ever been there requesting care was on that secret list," he
said. "And they wouldn't take you off that secret list until you had an
appointment time that was less than 14 days so it would give the
appearance that they were improving greatly the waiting times, when in
fact they were not."

I feel very sorry for the people who work at the Phoenix VA. They
all wish they could leave 'cause they know what they're doing is wrong.Dr. Sam Foote

Foote estimates right
now the number of veterans waiting on the "secret list" to see a primary
care physician is somewhere between 1,400 and 1,600.

Doctor: It's a 'frustrated' staff

"I feel very sorry for
the people who work at the Phoenix VA," said Foote. "They're all
frustrated. They're all upset. They all wish they could leave 'cause
they know what they're doing is wrong.

"But they have families,
they have mortgages and if they speak out or say anything to anybody
about it, they will be fired and they know that."

Several other high-level
VA staff confirmed Foote's description to CNN and confirmed this is
exactly how the secret list works in Phoenix.

Foote says the Phoenix
wait times reported back to Washington were entirely fictitious. "So
then when they did that, they would report to Washington, 'Oh yeah.
We're makin' our appointments within -- within 10 days, within the
14-day frame,' when in reality it had been six, nine, in some cases 21
months," he said.

Thomas Breen was so proud of his time in the Navy that he wanted to be treated only at a VA facility, his family says.

In the case of 71-year-old Navy veteran Thomas Breen, the wait on the secret list ended much sooner.

"We had noticed that he
started to have bleeding in his urine," said Teddy Barnes-Breen, his
son. "So I was like, 'Listen, we gotta get you to the doctor.' "

Teddy says his
Brooklyn-raised father was so proud of his military service that he
would go nowhere but the VA for treatment. On September 28, 2013, with
blood in his urine and a history of cancer, Teddy and his wife, Sally,
rushed his father to the Phoenix VA emergency room, where he was
examined and sent home to wait.

"They wrote on his chart
that it was urgent," said Sally, her father-in-law's main caretaker.
The family has obtained the chart from the VA that clearly states the
"urgency" as "one week" for Breen to see a primary care doctor or at
least a urologist, for the concerns about the blood in the urine.

"And they sent him home," says Teddy, incredulously.

Sally and Teddy say
Thomas Breen was given an appointment with a rheumatologist to look at
his prosthetic leg but was given no appointment for the main reason he
went in.

The Breens wait ... and wait ... and wait ...

No one called from the
VA with a primary care appointment. Sally says she and her father-in-law
called "numerous times" in an effort to try to get an urgent
appointment for him. She says the response they got was less than
helpful.

"Well, you know, we have
other patients that are critical as well," Sally says she was told.
"It's a seven-month waiting list. And you're gonna have to have
patience."

Sally says she kept
calling, day after day, from late September to October. She kept up the
calls through November. But then she no longer had reason to call.

Thomas Breen died on
November 30. The death certificate shows that he died from Stage 4
bladder cancer. Months after the initial visit, Sally says she finally
did get a call.

"They called me December 6. He's dead already."

Sally says the VA
official told her, "We finally have that appointment. We have a primary
for him.' I said, 'Really, you're a little too late, sweetheart.' "

At the end is when he suffered. He screamed. He cried.Sally Brenn on the death of her father-in-law

Sally says her father-in-law realized toward the end he was not getting the care he needed.

"At the end is when he
suffered. He screamed. He cried. And that's somethin' I'd never seen him
do before, was cry. Never. Never. He cried in the kitchen right here.
'Don't let me die.' "

Teddy added his father said: "Why is this happening to me? Why won't anybody help me?"

Foote says Breen is a
perfect example of a veteran who needed an urgent appointment with a
primary doctor and who was instead put on the secret waiting list --
where he remained hidden.

Foote adds that when veterans waiting on the secret list die, they are simply removed.

"They could just remove
you from that list, and there's no record that you ever came to the VA
and presented for care. ... It's pretty sad."

Foote said that the number of dead veterans who died waiting for care is at least 40.

"That's correct. The
number's actually higher. ... I would say that 40, there's more than
that that I know of, but 40's probably a good number."

CNN has obtained e-mails
from July 2013 showing that top management, including Phoenix VA
Director Sharon Helman, was well-aware about the actual wait times, knew
about the electronic off-the-books list and even defended its use to
her staff.

I think it's unfair to call any of this a success when Veterans are waiting 6 weeks on an electronic waiting listFrom 2013 Phoenix VA e-mail obtained by CNN

In one internal Phoenix
VA e-mail dated July 3, 2013, one staffer raised concerns about the
secret electronic list and raised alarms that Phoenix VA officials were
praising its use.

"I have to say, I think
it's unfair to call any of this a success when Veterans are waiting 6
weeks on an electronic waiting list before they're called to schedule
their first PCP (primary care physician) appointment," the e-mail
states. "Sure, when their appointment is created, it can be 14 days out,
but we're making them wait 6-20 weeks to create that appointment."

The e-mail adds pointedly: "That is unethical and a disservice to our Veterans."

Last year and earlier
this year, Foote also sent letters to officials at the VA Office of the
Inspector General with details about the secret electronic waiting list
and about the large number of veterans who died waiting for care, many
hidden on the secret list. Foote and several other sources inside the
Phoenix VA confirmed to CNN that IG inspectors have interviewed them
about the allegations.

VA: 'It is disheartening to hear allegations'

CNN has made numerous
requests to Helman and her staff for an interview about the secret list,
the e-mails showing she was aware of it and the allegations of the 40
veterans who died waiting on the list, to no avail.

But CNN was sent a statement from VA officials in Texas, quoting Helman.

"It is disheartening to
hear allegations about Veterans care being compromised," the statement
from Helman reads, "and we are open to any collaborative discussion that
assists in our goal to continually improve patient care."

Just before deadline Wednesday, the VA sent an additional comment to CNN.

It stated, in part: "We
have conducted robust internal reviews since these allegations surfaced
and welcome the results from the Office of Inspector General's review.
We take these allegations seriously."

The VA statement to CNN
added: "To ensure new Veterans waiting for appointments are managed
appropriately, we maintain an Electronic Wait List (EWL) in accordance
with the national VHA Scheduling Directive. The ability of new and
established patients to get more timely care has showed significant
improvement in the last two years which is attributable to increased
budget, staffing, efficiency and infrastructure."

Foote says Helman's
response in the first statement is stunning, explaining the entire
secret list and the reason for its existence was planned and created by
top management at the Phoenix VA, specifically to avoid detection of the
long wait times by veterans there.

"This was a plan that
involved the Pentad, which includes the director, the associate
director, the assistant director, the chief of nursing, along with the
medical chief of staff -- in collaboration with the chief of H.A.S."

Washington is paying attention

The Phoenix VA's "off
the books" waiting list has now gotten the attention of the U.S. House
Veterans Affairs Committee in Washington, whose chairman has been
investigating delays in care at veterans hospitals across the country.

According to Rep. Jeff
Miller, chairman of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, what was
happening in Phoenix is even worse than veterans dying while waiting for
care.

Even as CNN was working
to report this story, the Florida Republican demanded the VA preserve
all records in anticipation of a congressional investigation.

In a hearing on April 9,
Miller learned even the undersecretary of health for the VA wasn't
being told the truth about the secret list:

"It appears as though
there could be as many as 40 veterans whose deaths could be related to
delays in care. Were you made aware of these unofficial lists in any
part of your look back?" asked Miller.

DESLOGE, Mo. – The widow of a U.S. Army veteran says her husband died of illnesses she believes should have been diagnosed by his VA doctors in Farmington.
"It's sad for the VA to treat people like that. Because they treat them like dogs," said Katherine Myers.
William Myers was a U.S. Army veteran and a truck driver for over 30 years.
"He was my best friend," said Myers.
Myers lost her husband on New Year's Day, and his death is still painful
"I go to bed at night and I cry," she said.
In a three-page letter to NewsChannel 5, Myers detailed her husband's VA health care during the last year of his life. On December 11, Myers says her husband's physician at the Farmington VA Clinic was informed that William Myers had numbness in his arm and a persistent cough.
Myers says the VA doctor did no examination about the numbness and didn't indicate anything was wrong with his lungs.
She says on December 20 an ambulance took her husband to Parkland Hospital's emergency room after he fell at home. He received a CT scan.
"That's when they came back and told me and my son that he had lung cancer and brain cancer. It shocked me. I started crying," she said.
Twelve days later, William Myers died. On his death certificate it said he had lung cancer for months. How many months, nobody knows.
Myers believes the VA should have found her husbands lung and brain cancers much sooner.
"I want to know why they waited around all year last year and the lung cancer was never brought up," she said.
The bill from the VA angered Myers even more. It's for an outpatient care visit on January 22. William Myers died on January 1.
On Tuesday we notified the VA in Poplar Bluff about this story. On Wednesday, Katherine Myers faxed permission for the VA to comment on her husband's care, but we were unable to get an on-camera response.
VA spokesperson Angela Smith sent an email, which reads, in part:
"We are very committed to our mission of providing high quality care to our veterans. We are taking steps to review our process along with the veteran's medical records to ensure our standards have been met."

03/24/2014 01:00 AM EDT
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is eliminating the annual requirement for most Veterans enrolled in VA's health care system to report income information beginning in March 2014. Instead, VA will automatically match income information obtained from the Internal Revenue Service and Social Security Administration.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 24, 2014 VA Removes Annual Income Reporting Requirement Eliminates Burden on Veterans, Improves Customer Service WASHINGTON – The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is eliminating the annual requirement for most Veterans enrolled in VA’s health care system to report income information beginning in March 2014. Instead, VA will automatically match income information obtained from the Internal Revenue Service and Social Security Administration. “Eliminating the requirement for annual income reporting makes our health care benefits easier for Veterans to obtain,” said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki. “This change will reduce the burden on Veterans, improve customer service and make it much easier for Veterans to keep their health care eligibility up-to-date.” Some Veterans applying for enrollment for the first time are still required to submit income information. There is no change in VA’s long-standing policy to provide no-cost care to indigent Veterans, Veterans with catastrophic medical conditions, Veterans with a disability rating of 50 percent or higher, or for conditions that are officially rated as “service-connected.” VA encourages Veterans to continue to use the health benefits renewal form to report changes in their personal information, such as address, phone numbers, dependents, next of kin, income and health insurance. For more information, visit www.va.gov/healthbenefits/cost or call VA toll-free at 1-877-222-VETS (8387). # # #

A
judge in Oakland, Calif. has issued a court order requiring the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs to hand over more documents about its
Cold War-era drug experiments on thousands of Vietnam veterans. U.S.
Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley said the documents requested
were "squarely relevant" to the claim that the government failed to
adequately notify veterans of the chemicals they were exposed to and
what that exposure might do to their health. A class action lawsuit
filed by the Vietnam Veterans of America and individual soldiers in 2009
claimed that the Army and the CIA used at least 7,800 veterans as human
guinea pigs for testing the effects of up to 400 types of drugs and
chemicals beginning in the 1950s under several project code names
including "Bluebird," "Artichoke" and "MKUltra," and "Project
Paperclip."

Fraudulent
e-mails are being sent to military members, military retirees, and
civilian employees, which appear to be sent by Defense Finance and
Accounting Services (DFAS). Although the email appears to come from DFAS
and displays a .mil email address it is
actually from a non-government email account. The e-mails indicate that
individuals who are receiving disability compensation from the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) may be able to obtain additional
funds from the IRS. If you do receive a notice from the IRS, respond
immediately. If you believe someone may have used your social security
number (SSN) fraudulently, notify IRS immediately by responding to the
name and number printed on the IRS notice or letter. You will need to
fill out the IRS Identity Theft Affidavit, Form 14039.

Neslo Ventureswebmaster@nesloventures.netuntitledpost2https://sites.google.com/feeds/content/nesloventures.net/www/22664463862816503012012-03-24T03:03:42.222Z2012-03-24T03:03:42.228Z2012-03-24T03:03:42.168ZAdequate Time

March 22, 2012 by Jeffrey Thomas

It
shouldn’t take a government agency (VA) very long to verify a medical
record that came from another government agency (one of the Armed
Forces). Most, if not all, of the documentation in question in these
medical records has already been checked and rechecked multiple times
prior to it reaching VA for a claim. In some cases, VA has even ran
tests then required the claimant to undergo the same exact tests they
contract out to a civilian agency (VES – Veterans Evaluation Services)
for no apparent reason other than to drag the process out even longer.
The only thing that VA is doing when they drag their feet in the claims
process is costing the TAX PAYERS more money. These claims should be
processed, start to finish, within 90 days. There is no reason to drag
them out for these lengthy periods, it only causes unwanted stress and
hardship on the service member and their families, which none of them
deserve.

For years now the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has rejected
legitimate claims by Servicemen on the hopes that the claimant wouldn’t
pursue any further action because of the length of time they (VA) take
to make their decision. In most cases, a claim can go unsettled for
12-18 months or longer. Depending on the determination from VA that
12-18 month period gets paid in a lump sum to the claimant. This amount
could range anywhere between a couple thousand dollars ($2,000), to
forty five to fifty thousand dollars ($45,000 – $50,000), to hundreds of
thousands of dollars (these figures are just base amounts and do not
include anything extra). With the number of returning Servicemen this
country is expecting and the percentage which will ETS or retire,
wouldn’t it be in VA’s best interest to settle these claims in a timely
manner rather than dragging them out for months or even years like our
Vietnam Veterans have encountered. Some of our Vietnam veterans are
receiving million dollar checks from the government due to these
ridiculous processes.

If VA is under staffed and cannot handle what is required of them to
process these claims in a respectable amount of time, our Government
Leaders should step in and do what it takes to make sure we are taken
care of. We, as Serviceman, never hesitated in completing our
mission(s) to guarantee the safety and well-being of this country! Why
does it take VA so long to CARE for US after we ETS or Retire? One VET
without a home, medical care, or the benefits they DESERVE is ONE too
many!!!!!

Jeffrey L. Thomas served in the U.S. Army and Indiana Army
National Guard. He retired after 22 years of service. He is married and
has six children and proud grandfather of one. Jeffrey has been
waiting on his disability claim for 16 months. He currently lives with a
family member, receiving food stamps, and trying to stay positive.

WASHINGTON -- More than 2,200 veterans had their personal
information accidentally posted on the genealogy website Ancestry.com
last year, a move that could potentially expose them to identify theft
crimes.

Officials from the Department of Veterans Affairs said all of the
veterans affected by the mistake will receive free credit monitoring
services to help mitigate any damage. The information posted online
included veterans’ names and Social Security numbers, but not any health
information.

The department said there is no evidence so far that any of the
personal information has been misused, but the agency is contacting all
of the individuals involved to ensure they are aware of the problem.

VA officials supplied the information to Ancestry.com in March 2011
as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the genealogy
site. The records were supposed to only contain information on deceased
veterans, but also included more than 2,200 living veterans due to a
department error.

Department officials found out about the error just last month.

“Ancestry.com has worked with us and immediately removed all the
information that we had supplied them,” Jerry Davis, department chief
information security officer, said in a statement. “VA places the
highest priority upon safeguarding the personal information of our
veterans. When lapses occur, we will immediately take prompt remedial
action, such as notification.”

Officials said they are still investigating why the information was mistakenly included in the records released to Ancestry.com.

Military.com reported last year that servicemembers killed in action
are easy, frequent targets for identity theft because the Social
Security Administration is required by FOIA to release their personal
information, including full names and social security numbers, to an
online database used by sites such as Ancestry.com. That information can
then be used to file fraudulent tax returns.

This article is provided courtesy of Stars and Stripes,
which got its start as a newspaper for Union troops during the Civil
War, and has been published continuously since 1942 in Europe and 1945
in the Pacific. Stripes reporters have been in the field with
American soldiers, sailors and airmen in World War II, Korea, the Cold
War, Vietnam, the Gulf War, Bosnia and Kosovo, and are now on assignment
in the Middle East.

Stars and Stripes has one of the widest distribution ranges of any newspaper in the world. Between the Pacific and European editions, Stars and Stripes services over 50 countries where there are bases, posts, service members, ships, or embassies.

Two former government employees have pleaded guilty in
federal court in Memphis to conspiring to embezzle nearly $900,000 from
veterans beneficiary accounts under their supervision.

Jack Perry,
75, and Robert Tabbutt, 67, admitted diverting funds from 10 different
accounts and using the money to pay personal expenses and to gamble at
Tunica casinos.

Perry had fiduciary duties over the accounts and Tabbutt is a former field examiner for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

If
a veteran cannot handle his or her affairs, the VA usually will appoint
a family member or, if necessary, ask the court to appoint one.

Federal prosecutor Justin Bailey said that between July 1999
and October 2008, the two men schemed to steal money from the
beneficiary accounts of disabled veterans by writing checks to
themselves from the accounts or withdrawing cash from the accounts.

They
pleaded guilty to embezzling $896,239.43 on Tuesday before U.S. Dist.
Court Judge S. Thomas Anderson. They will be sentenced Nov. 17.

"This
prosecution has brought to justice these two men, who were illegally
and shamefully taking benefits paid to disabled veterans for their own
selfish gain," U.S. Atty. Ed Stanton of Memphis said in a news release.

"We
will continue to work with the Department of Veterans' Affairs and
other law enforcement partners to prosecute those who would abuse their
positions of trust in order to prey on vulnerable members of our
community, especially veterans."

In a recent audit
of the VA Dis­abil­ity Com­pen­sa­tion Sys­tem at 16 Regional Offices,
the VA Office of the Inspec­tor Gen­eral esti­mates that the rat­ing
staff incor­rectly processed 23 per­cent of the 45,000 claims inspected.

Of the 16 Regional Offices, Bal­ti­more, MD
and Anchor­age, AK scored the low­est in com­pli­ance with VA
stan­dards. Both failed to meet 14 of the 15 process require­ments.
Extended man­age­ment vacan­cies were cited as one of the link­ing
fac­tors between all poorly per­form­ing Regional Offices. Because of
the vacan­cies, these offices lacked con­ti­nu­ity and proper
over­sight. As a result, pro­ce­dures were not devel­oped or
imple­mented to cor­rect pre­vi­ously iden­ti­fied prob­lems.

The Haas vs. Nichol­son claims
had the high­est rate of error. In Jan­u­ary, the VA released a report
claim­ing the TDIU errors would have resulted in an over­pay­ment of
over $1.1 bil­lion by 2016. While this may be true, the VA made no
effort to project the amount of dol­lars not paid to incor­rectly denied
vet­er­ans who would oth­er­wise have qual­i­fied. It’s quite
pos­si­ble that this amount might be much higher in the other
direc­tion.

Mean­while, at 83 per­cent of the Regional Offices,
Haas claims had a higher instance of the VA fail­ing to fol­low VA
pol­icy (5 of 6 sur­veyed failed the stan­dard). Haas claims involve
vet­er­ans who were likely exposed to Agent Orange but never set foot in
Viet­nam. Prior to the 2006 Haas v Nichol­son deci­sion,
mainly vet­er­ans who set foot on Viet­namese soil or road on craft up
rivers in Viet­nam were enti­tled to the pre­sump­tion of expo­sure.
Now, the VA is still attempt­ing to catch up to the claims back­log that
was caused by the VA appeal of that 2006 deci­sion. In 2009, the
deci­sion for Haas was upheld and the VA has since strug­gled to
main­tain con­ti­nu­ity between offices in how the back­logged claims
are processed. The report stated some of these claims were incor­rectly
denied after the ini­tial Haas deci­sion was upheld.

Vet­er­ans
receiv­ing denials or low-ball rat­ings within the past year for any
dis­abil­ity rat­ings may want to con­sider imme­di­ately look­ing over
their deci­sion and request a copy of their VA claim file. If the time passed since the deci­sion is close to the 12-month appeal dead­line, con­tact your Vet­eran Ser­vice Offi­cer
to dis­cuss the pos­si­bil­ity of appeal­ing it, if war­ranted. There
are both “for pay” and Pro Bono VSO’s. I sug­gest talk­ing to the Pro
Bono peo­ple first. Try to find one you trust who will han­dle your
claim in a pro­fes­sional man­ner.

Vet­er­ans already denied at
the Board of Appeals review may want to con­sider speak­ing with a
Vet­er­ans Law Attor­ney in their area, since VSO’s can­not rep­re­sent
vet­er­ans before the US Court of Appeals for Vet­er­ans Claims. Two
resources worth look­ing at are the National Orga­ni­za­tion of
Vet­er­ans Advo­cates (NOVA) and National Vet­er­ans Legal Ser­vices Pro­gram (NVLS).
There are many other attor­neys out there as well. A sim­ple Google
search could ren­der qual­ity results as well. Just be sure the lawyer
is accred­ited
by the Depart­ment of Vet­er­ans Affairs. Of course, con­fi­dent
vet­er­ans can always opt to rep­re­sent them­selves Pro Se before the
court, as well.

VA health care workers and benefits processors are receiving new
training in how to handle disability evaluations for veterans claiming
traumatic brain injuries after an internal investigation found a high
percentage of errors on those types of claims.

A May 18 report by
the VA Inspector General says a spot review of disability claims found
an 8 percent error rate in claims related to post-traumatic stress
disorder and a 19 percent error rate in claims related to traumatic
brain injury.

Half of the PTSD claims and slightly more than half of the TBI claims affected benefits, according to the report.

Overall,
the IG found a 23 percent error rate in the cases it reviewed, stemming
mainly from the fact that 82 percent of claims involved temporary 100
percent disability ratings for veterans who needed surgery or a specific
treatment for their service-connected disability. The majority of these
errors were technical and did not affect benefits, the report said.

For
PTSD-related claims, a review of 16,000 files processed between April
2009 and July 2010 found that the VA employees processing claims lacked
enough experience and training to be accurate.

The single biggest
mistake was failing to verify a specific event or events in service that
resulted in the stress, something that became easier in July 2010 when
VA rules were amended so a veteran’s statement by itself is considered
sufficient evidence. However, one-quarter of the errors resulted from
assigning incorrect effective dates to claims, and about 20 percent of
the errors involved incorrect mental health evaluations.

VA officials said they believe the problems with PTSD cases are resolved but will continue to monitor accuracy.

For
TBI, investigators looked at 4,100 claims completed from April 2009
through July 2010 and found 800 were processed incorrectly. Like the
problems with PTSD claims, the chief problem was inexperience and
undertrained staff, the report said.

Eighty-four percent of the
errors were the result of problems with medical examinations being
either inadequate or incorrect in identifying the symptoms of TBI and
whether there were residual disabilities that coexisted with other
mental conditions.

In response to the report, VA benefits and
health care officials said they are working to ensure that compensation
and pension examiners are trained in the proper procedures and will
require regional offices that process benefits to provide a second
reviewer for many TBI-related claims. A rater will be allowed to work
without a reviewer only if they have achieved a 90 percent accuracy rate
on 10 consecutive TBI cases, VA officials said in their formal response
to the report.

Training for medical personal in proper exam
procedures should be completed by June 30, but the new process for
second reviews of TBI cases will not take effect until Sept. 30.

Info @NesloVenturesinfo@nesloventures.netmanyerrorsinvamentalhealthclaims1https://sites.google.com/feeds/content/nesloventures.net/www/73959622758981564742011-05-24T13:27:44.883Z2011-05-24T13:30:03.624Z2011-05-24T13:30:03.578ZErrors Found in Processing of PTSD and TBI Claims

According to a recent Military Times article, a May 18
report by the VA Inspector General says a spot review of disability
claims found an 8 percent error rate in claims related to post-traumatic
stress disorder and a 19 percent error rate in claims related to
traumatic brain injury. Half of the PTSD claims and slightly more than
half of the TBI claims affected benefits, according to the report.
Overall, the IG found a 23 percent error rate in the cases it reviewed,
stemming mainly from the fact that 82 percent of claims involved
temporary 100 percent disability ratings for veterans who needed surgery
or a specific treatment for their service-connected disability. The
majority of these errors were technical and did not affect benefits, the
report said.

A review of 16,000 PTSD claims files processed between April 2009 and
July 2010 revealed that the single biggest mistake was failing to
verify a specific event or events in service that resulted in the
stress, something that became easier in July 2010 when VA rules were
amended so a veteran’s statement by itself is considered sufficient
evidence. However, one-quarter of the errors resulted from assigning
incorrect effective dates to claims, and about 20 percent of the errors
involved incorrect mental health evaluations. For TBI, investigators
looked at 4,100 claims completed from April 2009 through July 2010 and
found 800 were processed incorrectly. Eighty-four percent of the errors
were the result of problems with medical examinations being either
inadequate or incorrect in identifying the symptoms of TBI and whether
there were residual disabilities that coexisted with other mental
conditions. The errors were found to be largely the result of lack of
sufficient experience and training. In response to the report, VA
benefits and health care officials said they are working to ensure that
compensation and pension examiners are trained in the proper procedures
and will require regional offices that process benefits to provide a
second reviewer for many TBI-related claims.

St. Louis, MO (KSDK) - Some veterans in the St.
Louis region are still having surgery and dental procedures canceled or
postponed two months after the all clear was given at the St. Louis VA
Medical Center.

Officials suspended all procedures on February 2, 2011 after an
employee found a surgical tray pitted with corrosion. Multiple
investigations took place and more than 200 surgeries scheduled at the
facility were instead performed at other St. Louis hospitals at tax
payer's expense.

The center reopened March 10, more than a month after closure. VA
experts, along with private vendors and independent consultants,
examined the sterilization processing department and determined it was
safe to start surgeries again. But veterans are still having surgeries
and dental procedures postponed.

The hold up, according to VA officials, has to do with the decision
to replace or restore 63,000 dental and surgical instruments.

"We have a patient safety culture here. We wanted to make sure when
the instruments come out that we felt comfortable using them on
patients," said Dr. Michael Crittenden, Chief of Surgery.

He explained the enormity and complexity of the restoration process
takes time. But veterans tell the I-Team, all of that time is taking a
toll on services they've earned.

The surgery center is operating only at 70 percent while the dental
clinic hasn't done any restorative work like fillings or crowns in four
months. Routine dental cleanings are taking place at 60 percent of what
it was prior to the February closure.

One patient, who feared speaking on camera, said she had three
appointments canceled since February and worries about losing some of
her teeth.

"It just makes my blood boil that any veteran would be put in that
situation but also, these are lingering problems from what has happened
months and months and months ago," said Congressman Russ Carnahan, who
spearheaded a campaign for investigations and congressional hearings.

National Dental Labs contacted by the I-Team, say restoring dental
instruments should take three days. So why after eight weeks are
surgeries and dental procedures still being canceled?

Aesculap, a German company, is restoring the VA's instruments at its
Hazelwood facility. A company vice president told the I-Team, "We have
been working with St. Louis VA since mid-February...we don't control
what we receive and when...but it's typically a three day turn around."

VA officials insist it is not a procurement or bureaucratic red tape
problem. Dr. Crittenden said turnaround is taking longer than three days
but he is very pleased with the quality of work Aesculap has provided.

He said if a patient has a dental emergency, the VA will pay for an
outside dentist. Dr. Crittenden said they've paid for outside services
more than 100 times since the February closure.
Officials at the VA hope to be back to 100 percent capacity at both the
surgical and dental centers sometime in the next two weeks.

The sterilization concern was the second in less than a year at the
Cochran center. In 2010, faulty sterilization at the center's dental
clinic raised concerns that 1,812 veterans were potentially exposed to
hepatitis and HIV. Most of those veterans have been tested and no cases
of HIV or hepatitis have been connected to the dental clinic.

A Congressional hearing titled "Sacred Obligation: Restoring Veteran
Trust and Patient Safety," is now taking place in Washington, D.C.

Thousands of disabled veterans apply for Chapter 31 Vocational
Rehabilitation every year. Some are successful in getting the benefits
they deserve and some are not. In my time researching and writing on the
subject, there seems to be a common theme arising: lies. This leads one
to conclude that either there are guidelines to excuses somewhere that
Voc Rehab Counselors live by, or there is an underlying discussion
between offices as to what excuses can be used to keep deserving
disabled veterans from their benefits.

It reminds me of a period of my life when I spent a great deal of my
recreational time researching the Bible. Living in England at the time, I
used the ESV Bible, the Cambridge Companion to the Bible, the Nag
Hammadi Scriptures, and a copy of The Living Buddha, Living Christ that
my grandmother sent me. Over the years, scholars have found there to be
such commonality between the
New Testament Gospels that they came to believe there existed a fifth
text referred to as “Q.” Q is believed by many scholars to be the first
written gospel that contained many of the quotes and anecdotes of Jesus’
time on Earth.

In a similar way, one cannot help but speculate that there is a
similar text that creates a common set of lies Voc Rehab Counselors tell
disabled veterans when denying claims. Yet in my searches for it, I
seem to only find regulations that support veterans’ claims for benefits
— strange.

Background.The Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General (DVA OIG) ordered an audit of the VR&E program in 2007 and a subsequent survey sampling of 80,000 veterans to
find out why so many disabled veterans never complete the program.
While VR&E boasts a success rate of close to 75 percent to the U.S.
Congress, the real number is much lower. According to the DVA OIG, the
true success rate is closer to 18 percent. Most qualified veterans drop
out of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) prior to
developing an Individual Written Rehabilitation Plan (IWRP). Many more
drop out prior to finishing the program. VR&E has not been including
these cases in their reported success rate.

In Corporate America, this is called “cooking the books,” for which
people have gone to jail and been sued. Lucky for VR&E, the
officials of this ENRON of the federal government are largely blanketed
by sovereign immunity. The government has to agree to let you sue the
government. Convenient.

The following is a list of a few of most common fish stories given by
Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors to deny veterans access to Chapter
31 benefits:

1. Veterans with high disability ratings usually fail to complete their training.
2. You cannot use Voc Rehab if you are Individually Unemployable (IU).
3. Veterans with families have a harder time completing their programs.
4. Voc Rehab will not pay for graduate school.
5. If you have a job, you do not qualify for Voc Rehab.

Lie #1 – Veterans with high disability ratings usually fail to complete their training.
Truth – The survey states that veterans with a higher disability rating
also have a higher likelihood of successfully completing their program.
This includes veterans with VR&E ratings of “serious employment
handicap.”

Lie #2 – You cannot use Voc Rehab if you are Individually Unemployable (IU).
Truth – According to the training module, veterans with a 100 percent
disability rating can and do use VR&E for retraining purposes to
obtain jobs, if possible. Additionally, veterans with an IU are also
allowed to use the program. Further, finishing the training program does
not automatically result in a reduction of IU. Supposedly, it cannot be
reduced for a year following employment.

Lie #3 – Veterans with families have a harder time completing their programs.
Truth – There is no significant effect on program success rates when
comparing veterans with families to those without families. This
includes a comparison between veterans relating to spouses and veterans
with children.

Lie #4 – Voc Rehab will not pay for graduate school.
Truth – I used VR&E for my undergrad and now have an Individualized
Written Rehabilitation Plan stating I can attend law school in the
program. ‘Nuff said. VR&E will send people to graduate school, to
include law school, medical school, dental school, and airline pilot
training. It can also pay for starting small businesses and allocating
in excess of $100,000 for the start up, according to participating SBA
Veteran Business Counselors working with the program.

Lie #5 – If you have a job, you do not qualify for Voc Rehab.
Truth – Over 42 percent of all disabled veterans using VR&E services
are employed at the time of admittance. Thirty-five percent hold jobs
throughout the period of retraining. Of those, over half of them felt
their current job was inline with their military and/or civilian
training. So, 28,000 veterans who used VR&E for retraining were
employed at the time they entered the program.

That’s the truth about the VA, according to the VA. The information
is out there, but it’s not presented in way that is readily accessible.
Plus, it’s hard to pick your head up to do the research when your horns
are locked with your Voc Rehab Counselor.

To the quality counselors out there, thank you for your diligent
efforts to support disabled veterans in their quest for purpose and
success outside of the green uniform. And to those who dish out fish
stories, I for one have had it up to my eyeballs with you. There will be
a day of reckoning, in this life or the next. Accountability will come
for all the lives that have been hurt by the renegade behavior of some
Voc Rehab Counselors. Many media outlets have begun to investigate the
actions of the VA, including the actions of Voc Rehab officials. To you
who do harm to vets, it’s time to be on the right side of this story.

December 23, 2010 -
Vietnam Veterans suffering specific presumptive illnesses related to
their Agent Orange exposure while in service began filing their
disability claims approximately 6 weeks ago. In that time period, the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) processed and resolved over 28,000
claims.

VA Sec. Eric Shinseki credited the VA's ability to process so many
disability claims so quickly to improved technology. At the same time,
he cited the continuous improving and streamlining of the disability
claims process. According to Sec. Shinseki, the VA is also aggressively
reaching out to Vietnam veterans and pushing them to put in their
disability claims and take advantage of the earned benefits.

This new Agent Orange presumptive disease list allows Vietnam veterans diagnosed with the following illnesses to collect disability benefits as well as be eligible for health care:

Parkinson's Disease;

Ischemic heart disease; or

B-cell (hairy cell) leukemia.

All Vietnam veterans suffering from an illness listed on the VA's
presumptive list can file for disability compensation. Because of the
number of claims the VA anticipated would be filed when they updated
their presumptive illness, these claims are the first to utilize the
VA's automated claims processing system.

Veterans can also be treated for their service-related presumptive
illnesses through non-VA physicians. These claims can also be filed as
long as they are accompanied with the correct paperwork.

ST. PETERSBURG, Florida - From his one-room apartment, Terry Richards does what he can to survive below the poverty level.

Richards, 62, is a Vietnam-era vet makes less than $12,000 a year in
social security and pension benefits. In years he spends a large
portion of his income on medical expenses, he gets partial
reimbursement.

"Every penny counts for me and others like me," Richards said of the
637,000 veterans and family members who rely on Veterans Benefits
Administration (VBA) pensions.

But Richards recently discovered that the miles he claimed for trips
to his doctor's appointments weren't reimbursed at the 41.5-cent rate
Congress mandated in 2008. Because the VA hadn't updated its expense report form in years, veterans were still instructed to only claim 28.5 cents per mile.

For Richards, it made the difference of $56 one year. 10 News found other veterans with larger discrepancies.

"$56 is a lot of money when you only make $985 a month," Richards said.

He started writing letters to the VBA and Congressman Bill Young, a
long-time veterans advocate. The VBA eventually sent him a check for
the $56, but still didn't update the forms.

A spokesperson for the agency told 10 News that updating
the form online was unnecessary, since the VBA automatically credits
veterans the difference once they send in their annual reports with the
wrong amount.

But they didn't in the cases 10 News studied. They also weren't able to tell how many of the forms were turned in last year.

Congressman Young eventually penned a letter to the head of the agency,
citing "the need to immediate update the VA's 'Medical Expense Report'
form (VA Form 21-8416) to ensure that our nation's veterans are properly
being reimbursed for their travel expenses."

Thousands of veterans who served our country seem to have
been taken advantage of when it comes to their benefits. It involves
vets who have been declared incompetent and are receiving VA benefits.

Ed Brewer is one of thousands of veterans who is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

"Now that I'm old and sick, and I need what I fought for... they're telling me to go to hell," he says.

In a speech from the House floor, Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC)
told his fellow representatives that if something isn't done about the
vets who are suffering from PTSD, the situation is going to get worse.

With pressure from Congress, the Department of Veterans Affairs has
been giving disability payments to veterans like Brewer. But while he
has been awarded benefits, Brewer can't receive them, because he has
been declared incompetent by the VA.

"I'm fighting for my life," Brewer says. "It's a tough battle, because I'm not young anymore."

When a veteran is declared incompetent, he or she must have a
guardian to handle finances. The Department of Veteran Affairs then
sends the money to the guardian in a direct deposit account.

Matt DeRouch, who was program manager for the fiduciary program for
the VA, says a guardian was supposed to receive five percent of the
veteran's VA benefits as payment, but he discovered the Regional office
was paying the guardians five percent of all income that the
incapacitated vet was earning.

"That included federal retirement, military retirement, and investments. They were taking five percent of everything," he says.

DeRouch says he went to his direct supervisor and showed him what he
found. "He shook his head and couldn't believe what I just discovered."

It was an honest mistake made by the regional office of the
Department of Veteran Affairs, and upon discovering the problem, the
Department tried fixing it.

It started sending out letters to guardians explaining they were now
only entitled to five percent of VA benefits, that they had been
overpaid and needed to return the money.

However, guardians fought back, saying this is not what the courts awarded.

That's when the VA backed off.

DeRouch says the Department's first reaction was a good call, but
then there was a meeting and it was decided if this got out, there would
be gridlock in the process.

In order to solve the problem, internal memos and e-mails show the
regional office came up with a solution that allowed guardians to
collect five percent of all the veteran's income by declaring it was
for extraordinary services and they could collect extraordinary fees.

"The undersecretary on down signed off on this process in clear violation of the law," DeRouch says.

The VA justifies it by saying if the Florida courts appoint a
guardian, a five percent commission is permissible under the Florida
Uniform Veterans Guardianship Act. But a March 2010 Inspector General
Audit found VA regional officers are not consistently taking effective
actions to insure the income and estates of incompetent beneficiaries
are protected.

Which brings us back to Ed Brewer, who is waiting for a guardian
after the VA declared him incompetent... despite the fact a psychiatrist
who works for the VA says Brewer is totally competent, he is aware of
his benefits, spending them wisely and doesn't need a guardian.

Brewer says, "I remember the recruiter saying, 'Son, if anything ever
happens, we're going to be there for you.' Now I'm a broke down,
sick old man. I need my country, and all I get from my country is the
middle finger and a foot in the ass."

Brewer is lucky he can fight the system, but thousands of others who
are incompetent are losing benefits after fighting to protect our
country.

St. Louis, MO (KSDK) - News Channel 5's I-Team has
confirmed Congressional hearings will open Tuesday in Washington to
examine problems at the St. Louis VA as well veteran centers in Miami
and Dayton.

The House Committee on Veterans' Affairs calls the hearing "Sacred Obligation: Restoring Veteran Trust and Patient Safety."
Sources tell the I-Team that the witness list may include Eric
Shinseki, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, as well
as representatives from the Inspector General's office and the General
Accounting Office.

The I-Team has reported extensively about a series of issues at the St. Louis VA, including the closure of its surgery and dental
centers in February after an employee identified spots on surgical
trays. The center re-opened a month later after multiple investigations
were unable to determine a source for metallic corrosion.

"Closing the surgical suites prevented any patient harm and I'm proud
our staff knew to stand up for patient safety," said Rima Nelson,
director of the St. Louis VA. "We are always focused on patient safety,
and now we are opening back up, fully confident we are providing our
Veterans the quality care they earned."

"Our veterans deserve the best quality care available, period. It
shouldn't matter whether they live in St. Louis, or Dayton, or anywhere
else," Carnahan said Wednesday. "My focus is on finding solutions that
ensure veterans here in St. Louis receive the same top quality care that
the VA provides elsewhere in the country, and I hope this hearing helps
us take another solid step toward that goal."

In Ohio, Republican Rep. Mike Turner has been pressing for more
information as well. At the Dayton VA Center, hundreds of veterans have
been tested for potential infections after treatment there by a dentist who allegedly failed to change latex gloves or sterilize instruments between patients for 18 years.

Info @NesloVenturesinfo@nesloventures.netvacongressionalhearingsannounced1https://sites.google.com/feeds/content/nesloventures.net/www/31610416320208527692011-04-14T23:33:46.411Z2011-04-14T23:36:33.377Z2011-04-14T23:36:33.334ZVA Care End Eyed for 1.3 Million Vets

Budget Panel Eyes End to VA Care for 1.3 Million Vets

The
House Budget Committee, chaired by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), has told a
veterans' group it is studying a plan to save $6 billion annually in VA
health care costs by cancelling enrollment of any veteran who doesn't
have a service-related medical condition and is not poor.

Committee
Republicans, searching for ways to curb federal deficits and rein in
galloping VA costs, are targeting 1.3 million veterans who claim
priority group 7 or 8 status and have access to VA care.

Priority group 8
veterans have no service-connected disabilities and annual incomes, or
net worth, that exceed VA means-test thresholds and VA "geographic
income" thresholds, which are set by family size.

Priority Group 7
veterans also have no service-connected disabilities and their incomes
are above the means-test thresholds. But their incomes or net worth fall
below the geographic index. In other words, because of where they live,
in high cost areas, they likely struggle financially.

Joseph
Violante, national legislative director for Disabled American Veterans,
said he first learned of the committee's interest in possibly narrowing
access to VA clinics and hospitals from a DAV member from Wisconsin,
chairman Ryan's home state.

Violante and other DAV officials
arranged their own meeting with a staff member for the committee. He
confirmed growing interest in a cost-saving initiative to push priority 7
and 8 veterans out of VA health care.

As this budget committee
staffer reminded Violante, proponents for opening VA health care to all
veterans had argued it would be cost neutral to VA. That's because VA
would charge these vets modest co-payments for their care. Also VA would
bill these veterans' private health insurance plans for the cost of
their VA care.

That argument from 1996 turned out to be wrong.
Co-payments collected from low-priority veterans and private insurance
plan billings today cover only 18 percent of the cost of care for group 7
and 8 veterans. By 2009, the annual net cost to VA to treat these
veterans totaled $4.4 billion or 11 percent of VA's annual medical
appropriation.

The figures come from the Congressional Budget
Office's annual report to Congress, "Reducing the Deficit: Spending and
Revenue Options." Among options it presented this year to the new
Congress for reducing VA spending is one to close enrollment in VA care
for all veterans in groups 7 and 8 and to cancel the enrollment of
veterans currently in two low priority groups.

CBO said this would
save VA $62 billion in the first 10 years, from 2012 to 2021. But the
net savings to the government over the same period, CBO said, would be
about half that amount. That's because many of the veterans bumped from
VA are old enough or poor enough to use Medicare or Medicaid, which
would drive up the cost of those programs.

We asked a committee spokesman for comment, both by e-mail and voice mail, but none came in time for this column's deadline.

Until
the mid-1990s, VA had denied health care to priority 7 and 8 veterans.
Congress changed that during the Clinton administration, enacting the
Veterans' Health Care Eligibility Act of 1996. The law directed VA to
build many more clinics across the country. To ensure enough patients to
fill these clinics, the VA secretary was given authority to expand care
eligibility.

The ban on group 7 and 8 veterans was ended by 1999.
Over the next three years their enrollment climbed to 30 percent of
total enrollees. By 2003, then-VA Secretary Anthony Principi stopped
allowing any more group 8 enrollments, saying their numbers strained the
system for higher priority veterans, including wounded returning from
Afghanistan and Iraq.

It's possible that, in sharing what the
budget committee eyed do to lower VA health costs, the professional
staffer assumed DAV would embrace cancellation of 7 and 8 enrollments
because few DAV members would be impacted. But Violante said DAV is
concerned, for two reasons.

One, some DAV members separated from
service with disabilities rated at 0 percent do have access to VA health
care as group 7 or 8 veterans.

A bigger concern for his members,
Violante said, is that tossing 1.3 million veterans from VA care would
leave the system without the "critical mass" of patients needed to
provide "a full continuum of care."

DAV officials worried that an
initiative to narrow VA enrollment would be included in the House
Republican budget plan unveiled this week. Ryan titled it "Path to
Prosperity" and the full committee endorsed it on a straight party line
vote April 6. The budget package, however, doesn't mention any change to
enrollment eligibility nor call for significant cuts to VA budgets.
Violante said DAV wants to talk House committees out of taking any
action to reduce VA enrollment.

CBO presented pros and cons for
cancelling 7 and 8 enrollments. An advantage is VA could refocus
services on "its traditional group of patients -- those with the
greatest needs or fewest financial resources."

It noted 90 percent
of group 7 and 8 enrollees had other health care coverage, either
Medicare or private insurance. So the "vast majority" cut loose would
have ready access to other coverage. Those who don't could be eligible
for health insurance exchanges to be set up in the future said CBO.

One
disadvantage is that many veterans who have come to rely on VA for at
least part of their medical care would see that care interrupted.

The
Obama administration and Congress actually had been moving in the
opposite direction, to expand VA enrollment, until Republicans won the
House. As Obama took office in 2009, VA announced that up to 266,000
veterans with no service-connected health conditions would be allowed to
enroll in VA health care. Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Texas) had fought
successfully to add $350 million to the 2009 VA budget so income
thresholds controlling priority 8 enrollments could be raised 10
percent.

Edwards lost his reelection bid last year. And new
priority 8 enrollees haven't rushed to join the system as VA officials
had expected.

Group 8 and 7 veterans using VA care pay $15 per
outpatient visit and a little more for specialty care. Inpatient fees
also are modest. The most popular benefit for many enrollees is
discounted prescription drugs. The co-pay usually is $8 for a 30-day
supply.

Tim Tetz with American Legion said his organization and
many veterans groups would strongly oppose tossing out group 7 and 8
veterans. He credits their enrollment since 1999 as helping to improve
VA care.

"If as great of a health care system as we have,
shouldn't we let all of our veterans have access to it, in some manner,"
Tetz asked.

While deficit hawks weigh this issue, VA still is
enrolling new group 8 veterans who fall below its income thresholds.
Those without dependents and living outside high-cost areas, for
example, must have income below a means test threshold of $32,342. More
information on group 8 enrollment is online at www.va.gov/healtheligibility or call (877) 222-VETS (8387).

Seems like a week can’t go by with­out hear­ing some new deficit reduc­tion planwith
vet­er­ans’ ben­e­fits in the crosshairs of politi­cians. All the
while, these same politi­cians appear more than will­ing for us to “help
lib­er­ate” one oil coun­try after another. Con­flicts like these are
great for mak­ing head­lines and dis­abled vet­er­ans, but they also
take from the lim­ited tax dol­lars needed to care for vet­er­ans after
the con­flicts end.

Recently, Min­nesota Con­gress­woman Michelle Bach­mann
backed off her plan to cut $4.5 bil­lion of fed­eral vet­er­ans’
ben­e­fits. But, Wisconsin’s famous Gov­er­nor, Scott
Walker, is look­ing to cut state funds for home­less vet­er­ans by 53
per­cent and over­all ben­e­fits by over $30 mil­lion.

Texas is propos­ing a 20 per­cent cut for the Texas Vet­er­ans Com­mis­sion
(TVC), total­ing over $3 mil­lion of their cur­rent $14 mil­lion
bud­get. TVC filed over 170,000 vet­er­ans’ claims that resulted in over
$2 bil­lion being paid out by the Depart­ment of Vet­er­ans Affairs.
This cut­back could result in a loss or delay of $760 mil­lion in
vet­er­ans’ ben­e­fits and a loss in state sales tax rev­enue of more
than $26 mil­lion.

Cal­i­for­nia
Gov­er­nor Jerry Brown ­re­cently pro­posed a $10 mil­lion cut for
another agency that helps return­ing Iraq and Afghanistan vet­er­ans in
acquir­ing fed­eral VA ben­e­fits. Accord­ing to lob­by­ist Pete Conaty,
for every $1 spent to get a vet­eran his or her ben­e­fits, the
vet­eran receives $100 in ben­e­fits. This is money that stays in the
local econ­omy where the vet­eran lives. It doesn’t go to for­eign aid
or to some Wall Street bank. It goes to the veteran’s local hard­ware
store or cof­fee shop, wher­ever she spends her money.

Per­spec­tive.
In Cal­i­for­nia, 30,000 vet­er­ans return to civil­ian life every
year, many of them with injuries and ques­tions about their ben­e­fits.
Prior to the cur­rent wars, vet­er­ans had a 10-day wait to talk with a
ben­e­fits coun­selor in per­son. Now, it takes 6 to 8 weeks for an
appoint­ment. With these cuts, that delay could be even longer. States
with sim­i­lar cuts will impact vet­er­ans every­where. But, what makes
no sense is, that by cut­ting the up front money, these same states
could lose even more mil­lions in tax rev­enue.

But this all may
make sense on a broader spec­trum, even though the logic is skewed.
There seems to be a recent polit­i­cal trend to cut fed­eral ben­e­fits
for every­one. Unfor­tu­nately, as in Texas, vet­er­ans ben­e­fits
pro­grams are being cut at a dis­pro­por­tion­ate rate within the state
gov­ern­ments. When attempts to cut vet­er­ans’ ben­e­fits show to be
unpop­u­lar on the national front, polit­i­cal par­ties appear to be
turn­ing to the states to make up the dif­fer­ence. Either way you skin
the cat, the Depart­ment of Vet­er­ans Affairs could be pay­ing out less
money in ben­e­fits to vet­er­ans who are truly enti­tled to them over
the long term.

Info @NesloVenturesinfo@nesloventures.netmorewarslessveteransbenefits1https://sites.google.com/feeds/content/nesloventures.net/www/90258298367705975042011-03-31T16:11:31.081Z2011-03-31T18:26:32.874Z2011-03-31T18:26:32.871ZVA Employee Bonuses - Can I have one?

Although this is old news, it bears repeating to remain in the forefront.

Courtesy of The American Legion Burn pit - September 30, 2009

Rewarding the few....overlooking those in the trenches.
This week, the House Veterans Affairs Committee heard testimony on the
VA’s employee bonus program. This hearing was primarily focused on a
recent VA Inspector General investigation where they “discovered” $24
million in bonuses paid to VA’s Office of Information & Technology
(OI&T). This isn’t the first time OI&T has been in the
headlines, and I’m certain not the last. You might remember OI&T
was one of many who fell under scrutiny during the veteran data loss.
In the past year they were chastised for millions spent on programs,
projects, or information technology initiatives that were behind
schedule, over budget, or not necessary.
But the inequity or outright abuse of the employee bonus program does
not merely plague OI&T. In 2004, the Washington Post reported that
two-thirds of federal employees benefitted from employee bonuses. In
2007, the AP reported that $3.8 million were awarded in bonuses to
executive leaders within VA in 2006. Annually, VA employees nationwide
receive millions of dollars in bonuses. The VA Handbook authorizes
awards to recognize individual employees who make contributions in
support of the mission, organizational goals and objectives, and VA’s
Strategic Plan. It also directs the amount of combined basic pay,
allowance, differential, bonus award, or other cash payment that an
employee can receive during the calendar year is limited to the salary
of Executive Level 1 (2008 – $191,300).
I know a multitude of VA employees and former VA employees. I’ve
listened to their views and understanding of the bonus structure, the
overtime selection process and other salary issues. They point to a
subjective protocol hashed out behind closed doors that produces
favoritism, incongruity, and decreasing morale amongst the staff. VA
employees trudge daily as hapless victims – byproducts of systemic
mismanagement and a behemoth bureaucracy with no strong vision, clarity
of mission, or understanding of how to meet the needs of the 21st
century delivery of benefits to veterans.
Tens of millions of dollars have been paid on bonuses to what end? We
still wait on OI&T for a seamless VA medical record. We still wait
for an era where the veteran or service officer could submit all of her
information digitally and view the information within her file online.
We hope for a semester to begin where a student veteran receives his
education benefits early enough to pay all of his bills. We stand
staring at an ever-increasing backlog of veterans claims while VA
leadership spins the reason for the backlog towards the increasing
number of veteran claims, lack of adequate training for new staff, or
complex adjudication system. All the while, thousands of VA employees
receive a bonus.
Does every VA employee who receives a bonus deserve it? Absolutely not.
When a bonus is determined based on a limited issuance of “fee-basis
cards” you encourage VA staff to not decide what’s in the best interest
of the patient, but rather the best interest of the veteran. When a
performance based bonus system includes data such as the number of
claims decided. You invite VA employees to make a decision just to put
down another “tick mark.” It might not be the right decision and may be
reconsidered upon appeal, but he/she got the credit and corresponding
bonus in the meantime while the veteran suffered. When a VA employee is
evaluated upon the number of veterans “served” through public contact,
you implicitly create an environment where conversations are limited in
time and scope. You limit the ability for an employee to discover the
root of the issue or concern that brought the veteran to the VA in the
first place. Yet these bonuses are issued because they recognize these
employees who made these contributions.
There are deserving employees in VA who should receive a bonus. They
include some of those on the front lines caring for the patients at the
clinic, proving that the VA health-care system is the best in the
nation. They include those employees burying the veterans within the
National Cemetery system and maintaining the final resting places of our
nation’s heroes. There are even those within the benefits system who
work tireless hours and realize each claim is not just a pile of papers
but a real veteran or family member seeking assistance. These are the
VA employees who should be receiving a bonus. When they contribute as
part of a team that truly meets or exceeds our limited expectations,
they should be compensated.
I’m not criticizing an employee bonus program. I certainly wish I
qualified for one. I’m complaining about a bonus program that appears to
be as flawed as some parts of the VA itself. In the past year, we’ve
paraded numerous CEOs before the media and Congress and criticized them
for mismanaged employee compensation, golden parachutes, and employee
bonuses. If we can criticize AIG, Fannie or Freddie on their bonus
structure, why not the Federal government? The current VA bonus system
rewards some VA employees not diligently working towards better service
to America’s veterans while overlooking those in the trenches actually
trying to deal with veterans, the claims backlog and other VA concerns.
Find a bonus program that appropriately rewards these unsung heroes,
and the VA, our veterans, and our nation will be better off.

Although this is old news, it bears repeating to remain in the forefront.

2007-05-04

WASHINGTON — Congressional leaders on
Thursday demanded that the Veterans Affairs secretary explain hefty
bonuses for senior department officials involved in crafting a budget
that came up $1 billion short and jeopardized veterans’ health care.

Rep. Harry Mitchell, chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs
subcommittee on oversight, said he would hold hearings to investigate
after The Associated Press reported that budget officials at the
Veterans Affairs Department received bonuses ranging up to $33,000.

Sen. Daniel Akaka, who heads the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee,
said the payments pointed to an improper “entitlement for the most
centrally placed or well-connected staff.” He has sent a letter to VA
chief Jim Nicholson asking what the department plans to do to eliminate
any bonuses based on favoritism.

“These reports point to an apparent gross injustice at the VA that we
have a responsibility to investigate,” said Mitchell, D-Ariz. “No
government official should ever be rewarded for misleading taxpayers,
and the VA should not be handing out the most lucrative bonuses in
government as veterans are waiting months and months to see a doctor.”

One member of the House committee, Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill., called for Nicholson to resign.

A list obtained by the AP of bonuses to senior career officials in
2006 documents a generous package of more than $3.8 million in payments
by a financially strapped agency straining to help care for thousands of
injured veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Misleading numbers
Among those receiving payments were a deputy assistant secretary and
several regional directors who crafted the VA’s flawed budget for 2005
based on misleading accounting. They received performance payments up to
$33,000 each, a figure equal to about 20 percent of their annual
salaries.

Also receiving a top bonus was the deputy undersecretary for
benefits, who helps manage a disability claims system that has a backlog
of cases and delays averaging 177 days in getting benefits to injured
veterans.

The bonuses were awarded even after government investigators had
determined the VA repeatedly miscalculated — if not deliberately misled
taxpayers — with questionable methods used to justify Bush
administration cuts to health care amid the burgeoning Iraq war.

Annual bonuses to senior VA officials now average more than
$16,000 — the most lucrative in government. All bonuses are proposed by
division chiefs, then approved by Nicholson.

A VA spokesman said the payments are necessary to retain hardworking
career officials. “Rewarding knowledgeable and professional career
public servants is entirely appropriate,” spokesman Matt Burns said.

Several veterans groups questioned the practice. They cited
short-staffing and underfunding at VA clinics that have become
particularly evident after recent disclosures of shoddy outpatient
treatment of injured troops at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in
Washington.

“Rewarding bureaucrats for failure while veterans wait for care is
inexcusable,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of the Iraq and
Afghanistan Veterans of America.

In a letter to Nicholson, Akaka also asked the department to outline
steps to address disparities in which Washington-based senior officials
got higher payments than their counterparts elsewhere.

“Awards should be determined according to performance,” said Akaka,
D-Hawaii. “I am concerned by this generous pat on the back for those who
failed to ensure that their budget requests accurately reflected VA’s
needs.”

Irreplaceable employees?
Burns, who said the department is reviewing Akaka’s request, said
many of the senior officials have the kind of experience that would be
hard to replace.

“The importance of retaining committed career leaders in any government organization cannot be overstated,” Burns said.

VA officials characterized the agency’s Washington-based jobs as more
difficult, often involving management of several layers of divisions
that would justify the higher payments.

In 2006, the VA officials receiving top bonuses included Rita Reed,
the deputy assistant secretary for budget, and William Feeley, a former
VA network director who is now deputy undersecretary for health for
operations and management.

Also receiving $33,000 was Ronald Aument, the deputy undersecretary
for benefits, who helps oversee the strained and backlogged claims
system that Nicholson now says is unacceptable.

In July 2005, the VA stunned Congress by suddenly announcing it faced
a $1 billion shortfall after failing to take into account the
additional cost of caring for veterans injured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The admission, which came months after the department insisted it was
operating within its means and did not need additional money, drew
harsh criticism from both parties and some calls for Nicholson’s
resignation.

'Angry personal attacks'
In urging Nicholson to step down, Hare cited problems with
accounting as well as data security that contributed to the loss of 26.5
million veterans’ sensitive personal information last year.

“Time and time again, Secretary Nicholson, a former chair of the
Republican National Committee, opted to offer political spin instead of
preparing for the inevitable influx of new veterans entering the
system,” Hare said. “Veterans deserve a secretary that will fight for
them.”

Burns, the VA spokesman, defended Nicholson. “Nobody cares more about
veterans than Secretary Nicholson,” Burns said, adding that his boss’s
“efforts to serve his fellow veterans will not be deterred by partisan
posturing and angry personal attacks.”

The investigative arm of Congress, the Government Accountability
Office, determined the VA had used misleading accounting methods and
claimed false savings of more than $1.3 billion, apparently because
President Bush was not willing, at the time, to ask Congress for more
money.

According to the White House Office of Personnel Management, roughly
three of every four senior officials at the VA have received some kind
of bonus each year. In recent years, the payment amount has steadily
increased from being one of the lowest in government — $8,120 in 2002 —
to the most generous — $16,713 in 2005.

In contrast, just over half the senior officials at the Energy
Department in 2005 received an average bonus of $9,064. Across all
government agencies, about two-thirds of employees received bonuses,
which averaged $13,814 in 2005, the most recent data available.

WASHINGTON
– Officials of the Department of Veterans Affairs and the American
Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) have reached final agreement
on a new national collective bargaining agreement, their first since
1997. This contract will enhance VA’s partnership with the union,
change the rules for teleworking and expand the use of e-mail in
labor-management relations.

“This
new agreement reflects VA’s commitment to collaborate with an important
labor partner,” said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki.
“The outcome will be a more highly motivated, more effective workforce
serving our Nation’s Veterans.”

About
204,000 of VA’s 315,000 employees are eligible for AFGE membership,
with another 23,000 employees eligible for membership in four other
unions.

Secretary
Shinseki approved the contract on March 15. The complete labor
agreement will be signed soon by Shinseki, AFGE leadership and the VA
and AFGE members of the bargaining teams at an internal event that will
be broadcast at VA facilities around the country.

Among the provisions of the contract are:

· Enhanced collaboration with union officials on work-related issues;

· Expansion of teleworking among employees, including clarification of rules governing telework; and

· Increased reliance upon e-mails and new technology in labor-management communications and processes.

VA
is the second largest cabinet office in the country in terms of
workforce. VA employees operate 153 major medical centers, about 1,200
other sites of health care, manage a nationwide system of 131 national
cemeteries, and administer about $75 billion in disability compensation,
Veterans pensions, educational benefits, home loan guarantees, life
insurance and other financial programs.

Info @NesloVenturesinfo@nesloventures.netvaafgereachagreementonnewunioncontract1https://sites.google.com/feeds/content/nesloventures.net/www/7958343557113088812011-03-11T16:49:15.265Z2011-03-11T16:53:34.824Z2011-03-11T16:53:34.717ZNew Members Appointed to VA Committee on Women Veterans

March 4, 2011
Courtesy of Department of Veterans Affairs

WASHINGTON
– Four new members have been appointed to the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Advisory Committee on Women Veterans, an expert panel that
advises VA on issues and programs affecting women Veterans.

“The
Advisory Committee on Women Veterans’ work is very important in guiding
VA’s efforts to address the ever changing needs of women Veterans,”
said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki. “VA welcomes the
newest members.”

Established
in 1983, the advisory committee makes recommendations to the Secretary
for administrative and legislative changes. The committee members are
appointed to two-year terms. The new committee members are: Jack
Phillip Carter, Jr., Bradenton, Fla.; Nancy A. Glowacki, Silver Spring,
Md.; Nancy Kaczor, Franklin, Wis.; and Terry F. Moore, Stetson, Maine.

“Throughout
history women have played essential roles in the military,” Shinseki
added. “It is VA’s responsibility to anticipate and prepare for the
evolving needs of women Veterans, their families and survivors.”

Women
Veterans are one of the fastest growing segments of the Veterans
population. There are 23.4 million Veterans; approximately 1.8 million
are women Veterans. They comprise nearly 8 percent of the total
Veterans population and nearly 5 percent of all Veterans who use VA
health care services.

VA
estimates that by 2020 women Veterans will comprise 10 percent of the
Veteran population. VA has women Veterans program managers at VA medical
centers and women Veterans coordinators at VA regional offices to
assist women Veterans with health and benefits issues.

New Members

VA Advisory Committee on Women Veterans

Jack
Phillip Carter, Jr., Bradenton, Fla. A retired Marine Corps lieutenant
colonel, decorated for valor during the Persian Gulf War; currently
serves as lead detective of the economic crimes section for the Sarasota
police department.

Nancy
A. Glowacki, Silver Spring, Md. A former Army Reserves officer;
currently owns a consulting firm, where she serves as a subject matter
expert on Veterans’ transition issues, specializing in employment and
special challenges of disabled Veterans and Veterans of the Global War
on Terrorism.

Nancy Kaczor, Franklin, Wis. A
retired Air Force colonel, with service in Kosovo, Kuwait, Iraq and
Afghanistan; currently serves as an active volunteer for a number of
Veterans and community service organizations.

Terry
F. Moore, Stetson, Maine. A retired Air Force lieutenant colonel;
currently serves as chair of the Maine Advisory Commission on Women
Veterans, and serves on several professional and Veterans service
organizations.